Interim Order 9

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 52 Ct. Cases 536/2024
TASLEEM Vs. HUNNY KUMAR AND ORS
PS Sadar Bazar
14.08.2025
Present : Sh. Ahmad Osama, Ld. Counsel for complainant.
Complainant is absent.
Arguments on the application u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C. heard.
The entire case file including the ATR has been perused carefully.
Reproduction of facts is dispensed with for the sake of brevity and
saving judicial time.
In the considered opinion of this Court the perusal of complaint and
the annexures attached therewith reveal that the allegations contained therein do not
disclose commission of such cognizable offence which is required to be investigated
by the police .
Reliance is placed by this Court on the judgment delivered in case
titled as 'M/s Skipper Beverages P. Ltd. Vs. State', 2002 Cr.L.J. NOC 333 (Delhi)
wherein Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. empowers a
Magistrate to direct police to register case and initiate investigation but this power
has to be exercised judiciously and not in a mechanical manner. Those cases where
allegations are not very serious and complainant herself in possession of evidence to
prove allegation, there should be no need to pass order u/sec.156(3) Cr.P.C. But
cases where the Magistrate is of the view that nature of allegation is such that
complainant himself may not be in position to collect and produce evidence before
court, and interest of justice demand that police should step in to help complainant,
police assistant can be taken.
Therefore, the application u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C. for registration of an FIR
in the present case stands dismissed. An opportunity is granted to the complainant to
prove his case by leading evidence in his support.
Be put up for PSCE on 27.10.2025.
(GAURAV GOYAL)
JMFC-06(C)/THC/Delhi/14.08.2025
-- 1 of 1 --